If this is true ASRock is going to sell a shitload of boards because of it.

Click to expand...

I don't know about that atm current cards don't make use of full 2.0 bandwidth, I can't see selecting a board for single or SLI / Xfire based solution based on PCI 3.0 support or lack there of. I'd take the 2-3 FPS hit and go with things that matter to me more like the number of SATA ports and UEFI support.

The new AMD GPGPU arch GCN aims to kill it with a open standards compliant design.

Cuda will be dead when this rolls out or it will become massively less important and more specialized and as AMD is going put this design into APU's in the next 2 years, yep. Cuda is a dead man walking.

The new AMD GPGPU arch GCN aims to kill it with a open standards compliant design.

Cuda will be dead when this rolls out or it will become massively less important and more specialized and as AMD is going put this design into APU's in the next 2 years, yep. Cuda is a dead man walking.

Now if nvidia was smart, they would move to standards compliance.

Click to expand...

I thin CUDA is far from a dead man walking, especially in the super computer world, it's the standard. PhysX on the other hand is and has been dead IMO for some time, there has just not been a break out title that supported it mainly because all major titles are console ports, and as such CAN'T support PhysX, and it will continue to be that way until the next gen consoles come out. IMO Nvidia should have simply offered AMD a licensing agreement, and offered "incentives" to game developers to use PhysX.

As it stand I don't see CUDA going anywhere for a long time, especially for distributed computing (F@H anyone) and super computing applications. I just don't see the point in offering a competing standard to PhysX as it's a dead market, the problem is game developers outside of the RTS and MMO genres have turned their back on the PC platform, and the hardware they develop for is the better part of half a decade old, and can't handle good graphics let alone PhysX.

Q: Does PCIe 3.0 enable greater power delivery to cards?
A: The PCIe Card Electromechanical (CEM) 3.0 specification consolidates all previous form factor power delivery specifications, including the 150W and the 300W specifications.

Pre-SP2, Xp x64 was a nightmare to work with, both do to problems with the OS, and for limited driver support. However, by SP2 the OS was quite stable, and the Vista x64 push really brought quite a bit of driver support.

I really was sad to move away from XP x64, as it was truly my favorite of the Microsoft Operating Systems (low resources, 64bit, familiar interface, Server 2003 kernel, very fast).